4? Options

[User001]

I have read a lot about the supposed 4 options and after considerable thought about these and potential other options, it has occurred to me that there are really just 2 options:

- Compromise, or
- No compromise

Simple.  That's it.  

Both parties in the relationship either decide to work together and find compromise, or the relationship is irreparably broken.  It can be broken while the parties remain together or broken to the point of separation, but it is broken either way.

To suggest there are 4 options is disingenuous and provides false hope, particularly for those new to this situation and are trying to understand and find their way through it... After all, don't forget that most people here are still looking for yet another option! 

With regard to the generally accepted 4 options:

Compromise - is of course an option, however, the main caveat is that most often, neither party really gets what they truly want. It's kind of like, you can compromise to get a piece of what you are looking for... If that's enough. 

And needs can obviously be satisfied outside of the relationship - but there is a significant difference in how that can happen - either there is compromise by the asexual to permit this, or it is sought out by the sexual where no compromise is otherwise found. Generally the sexual is demonized for such actions, but what else can be expected in the absence of compromise? 

But celibacy - is not an option.  Celibacy is simply a result of no compromise.  You can't claim to "choose" to live a life of celibacy if the root of the issue is that your partner cannot agree to a compromise that helps to satisfy your needs. Celibacy is a choice that YOU make, not that your partner makes for you. 
 

That leaves us with separation - the final, ultimate result of no compromise, and where generally the onus of responsibility seems to be on the sexual party. If the sexual cannot find some sort of contentment with one of these scenarios of less than they want, then they need to pack up and leave. It is painted as an easy option and logical even, so why would it be questioned otherwise?  But it doesn't even remotely address the often massive challenge of doing such a thing for many partnerships and intertwined, dependent lives. 

 

My point is, I continue to see these '4 options' provided to sexuals as possible ways to navigate their situation, but the reality is that the only option is whether their asexual partner accepts some form of compromise or not. Because unfortunately, for the sexual partner, control over the situation is largely out of their hands. 

 

[The Sword]

34 minutes ago, User001 said:

And needs can obviously be satisfied outside of the relationship - but there is a significant difference in how that can happen - either there is compromise by the asexual to permit this, or it is sought out by the sexual where no compromise is otherwise found. Generally the sexual is demonized for such actions, but what else can be expected in the absence of compromise? 

No, ethical nonmonogamy is not a "compromise". And treating it as a compromise is setting yourself up to fail. Especially as people exist who would simply never agree to a relationship in the first place in which monogamy is even considered a negotiable option, and asking for monogamy is a dealbreaker. The Sword is one of those people.

 

 

35 minutes ago, User001 said:

But celibacy - is not an option.  Celibacy is simply a result of no compromise.  You can't claim to "choose" to live a life of celibacy if the root of the issue is that your partner cannot agree to a compromise that helps to satisfy your needs. Celibacy is a choice that YOU make, not that your partner makes for you. 

Of course celibacy is an option. It may be one you personally don't want to choose, but it is an option. You can absolutely just stop having sex; everyone can. (Though, obviously, most people don't want to, and would find it excruciatingly hard - for perfectly understandable reasons.) And that simply has nothing to do with the question of compromise.

 

 

So, no. There are four options, not two. You're wrong.

[Liara]

Hum, for me, compromise is an option I never really understood. I never really saw the point to have sex with someone who doesn't really want it or never feel the connection it can give me. And when your ace partner is sex-repulsed, the idea of this kind of compromise is just impossible.

 

But I understand what you mean, that we could call compromise for more things than just "sex with you or not". If you want. But does that change anything in mixed relationships? No. Just some changes of words. But results stay the same as before. So what's the point?

[AloneTogether]

In a way you are right (for many people) your options are reach a compromise both can live with or don’t find such a compromise and separate/divorce. However there are multiple compromises you can come to and the outcomes for both partners are so different they are distinct things. 
 

The option normally described as compromise  is just one kind of compromise. The nature of compromise is usually that no one gets exactly what they want. There are some asexuals who none the less still have a low level desire for some sex and perhaps for some sexuals that can be enough. Personally I’m with @Liara on this one that I could not be satisfied with sex where I didn’t feel desired by my sexual partner which is why this is not, for me, a good or acceptable compromise. 

Celibacy is a pretty extreme compromise, and one in which one partner does all

of the compromising and the other gets exactly what they wanted. You could certainly argue that this doesn’t fit the definition of compromise, which is “an agreement or settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions”, since only one side makes any concessions in this scenario. Certainly it’s an option some people take, either actively or by simply not taking any of the other options. Some people on here are certainly in that boat. Right now if I don’t actively take one of the other options it’s where I’ll end up, by default. It’s not one I want to allow myself to end up in.

 

For me ENM would be a compromise. It’s certainly not my first choice, which always has been and will always remain a satisfying sex life with my wife. Unfortunately that’s not going to happen, so am I willing to accept this compromise? I am, if my wife is. That’s still to be seen. I can see what @The Sword says that for some ENM is not a compromise, it is innate to who they are and for them monogamy would be a compromise. That does not describe me. 
 

For many of us on here (most?) divorce is the option we are trying to avoid because we love our partners and our lives are so entwined that we want to avoid that. Sadly it may not be avoidable for everyone. 
 

So, I disagree. Compromise or no compromise is a false dichotomy because it fails to describe the possible distinct outcomes. The four options usually presented makes a good job of describing clearly different possible outcomes and still the only 4 possible outcomes I can see.

[Liara]

Yep, I have to celibate because no other possibility but definitely not a compromise...

[Sarah-Sylvia]

When I see the options presented, they're usually not glorified, they're not ideal. So I don't see how they give false hope, especially if someone gives it a bit of thought. You always need to think for yourself what they mean or if they're possible for you.

[Traveler40]

52 minutes ago, AloneTogether said:

Compromise or no compromise is a false dichotomy because it fails to describe the possible distinct outcomes. The four options usually presented makes a good job of describing clearly different possible outcomes and still the only 4 possible outcomes I can see.

Agreed and very well stated response overall. 
 

For many, if you’ve spent time communicating with your ace, it boils down to the four outcomes begotten from the available choices:

 

sex with spouse

sex with self

sex with other than spouse

Divorce - no sex with ex-spouse, sex with others

 

See, we are now down to sex or no sex vs compromise or no compromise. It’s ridiculous reducing too far and divesting meaning. The extra description is necessary to capture mixed relationship options/outcomes cleanly. 
 

I occasionally wonder about the folks who drop by and don’t stay on AVEN that were searching for a magic 5th+ option. Likely, they are still waiting for an answer that will never come. 🫤

 

Make good choices and don’t let life bleed.

[Liara]

Just to add : breaking up often could mean "sex with self" and nothing more... Finding a new partner is not so easy.

[User001]

2 hours ago, The Sword said:

No, ethical nonmonogamy is not a "compromise". And treating it as a compromise is setting yourself up to fail. Especially as people exist who would simply never agree to a relationship in the first place in which monogamy is even considered a negotiable option, and asking for monogamy is a dealbreaker. The Sword is one of those people.

 

 

Of course celibacy is an option. It may be one you personally don't want to choose, but it is an option. You can absolutely just stop having sex; everyone can. (Though, obviously, most people don't want to, and would find it excruciatingly hard - for perfectly understandable reasons.) And that simply has nothing to do with the question of compromise.

 

 

So, no. There are four options, not two. You're wrong.

It doesn't make any sense to compare a person that once had an active sex life and now realizes they don't get anything out of it, with somebody that is sexual and chooses to be in non-monogamous relationships. 

 

Celibacy is not a chosen option if forced upon a person. 

[RoseGoesToYale]

8 hours ago, User001 said:

You can't claim to "choose" to live a life of celibacy if the root of the issue is that your partner cannot agree to a compromise that helps to satisfy your needs.

I don't like this. You make it sound like the asexual partner forces the sexual partner to be celibate, which is one step away from saying the sexual partner is owed sex. They are not and celibacy is ALWAYS a choice, reasoning be damned, just like being/staying in a relationship is a choice.

 

I think this dichotomy way oversimplifies the reality of people's relationships. There are more complex factors in play for what makes a relationship most likely to work out or not. In general, I look at three main factors that affect this: sexual attitude (favorable, neutral, averse, repulsed), libido level, and exclusivity (monogamous or Ethically Non-Monogamous).

 

From most to least likely to work out*:

Asexual (sex favorable, ENM) + Sexual (any libido, ENM)

Asexual (sex neutral, ENM) + Sexual (any libido, ENM)

Asexual (sex averse, ENM) + Sexual (any libido, ENM)

Asexual (sex repulsed, ENM) + Sexual (any libido, ENM)

Asexual (sex favorable, monogamous) + Sexual (any libido, monogamous)

Asexual (sex neutral, monogamous) + Sexual (low to average libido, monogamous)

Asexual (sex averse, monogamous) + Sexual (low libido, monogamous)

Asexual (sex neutral, monogamous) + Sexual (high libido, monogamous)

Asexual (sex repulsed, monogamous) + Sexual (low libido, monogamous)

Asexual (sex averse, monogamous) + Sexual (average to high libido, monogamous)

 

*This list is also a broad observation and by no means accounts for all the individual differences in any given relationship. There's also the aspect of level of importance of sex in a relationship. For some sexuals, sex is very important, for others, other things are more important.

 

The one combination that doesn't make the list is Asexual (sex repulsed, monogamous) + Sexual (high libido, monogamous), because, I'm sorry, this kind relationship never works out. I have yet to see it work out where both partners aren't miserable. It's just the reality of incompatibility. Also, open relationships can only work if both people are okay with ethical non-monogamy. Cheating negates any combination.

[Vorps]

I mean. If i'd come to this forum and been presented plainly with 'compromise or dont,' I'd have left, and I'd be less informed for it.

 

Trying to reduce the options into whatever elemental forms you're looking for misses the point of both having them, and the forum itself.

 

The goal here isnt total simplicity or accuracy. It's support, as best as we're able to manage, since everyone is different, and thus every relationship is. Some people see the options as false hope, some see them as conversation starters with their ace spouse in a time where conversation can be painful and difficult to navigate.

 

To summise, imo, to try to reduce the options to yes/no like that is missing the goal of having them in the first place. We're here to support and inform people in this extremely unique situation as best as we can.

[User001]

Whether people like the simplicity of it or not, the fact is that outcome of the situation is primarily determined by the asexual partner's willingness to compromise. 

 

As one pointed out, they are celibate because their partner is sex repulsed - not because they chose that. 

 

As another indicated, the sexual partner isn't owed sex, which is correct. Which is also an example of how the asexual generally determines the outcome of the situation.  

 

The real over simplification here is the repeated suggestion that compromise automatically means sex, which it does not. 

[Liara]

But what does that change?

[Sarah-Sylvia]

All depends on the people involved, for what choices are possible or how much they impact

[Sally]

4 hours ago, RoseGoesToYale said:

Also, open relationships can only work if both people are okay with ethical non-monogamy. Cheating negates any combination.

Yes.  

[The Sword]

5 hours ago, User001 said:

Celibacy is not a chosen option if forced upon a person. 

Celibacy is never forced upon anyone in a relationship. (Unless you're held prisoner by a psycho stalker, in which "relationship" is an odd term for it to begin with.)

 

 

1 hour ago, User001 said:

The real over simplification here is the repeated suggestion that compromise automatically means sex, which it does not. 

Wrong. Compromise, in the context of the four alternatives, always specifically refers to sexual activities between the ace and the sexual partner.

 

 

4 hours ago, RoseGoesToYale said:

I don't like this. You make it sound like the asexual partner forces the sexual partner to be celibate, which is one step away from saying the sexual partner is owed sex. They are not and celibacy is ALWAYS a choice, reasoning be damned, just like being/staying in a relationship is a choice.

 

I think this dichotomy way oversimplifies the reality of people's relationships. There are more complex factors in play for what makes a relationship most likely to work out or not. In general, I look at three main factors that affect this: sexual attitude (positive, neutral, averse, repulsed), libido level, and exclusivity (monogamous or Ethically Non-Monogamous).

 

From most to least likely to work out*:

Asexual (sex positive, ENM) + Sexual (any libido, ENM)

Asexual (sex neutral, ENM) + Sexual (any libido, ENM)

Asexual (sex averse, ENM) + Sexual (any libido, ENM)

Asexual (sex repulsed, ENM) + Sexual (any libido, ENM)

Asexual (sex positive, monogamous) + Sexual (any libido, monogamous)

Asexual (sex neutral, monogamous) + Sexual (low to average libido, monogamous)

Asexual (sex averse, monogamous) + Sexual (low libido, monogamous)

Asexual (sex neutral, monogamous) + Sexual (high libido, monogamous)

Asexual (sex repulsed, monogamous) + Sexual (low libido, monogamous)

Asexual (sex averse, monogamous) + Sexual (average to high libido, monogamous)

 

*This list is also a broad observation and by no means accounts for all the individual differences in any given relationship. There's also the aspect of level of importance of sex in a relationship. For some sexuals, sex is very important, for others, other things are more important.

 

The one combination that doesn't make the list is Asexual (sex repulsed, monogamous) + Sexual (high libido, monogamous), because, I'm sorry, this kind relationship never works out. I have yet to see it work out where both partners aren't miserable. It's just the reality of incompatibility. Also, open relationships can only work if both people are okay with ethical non-monogamy. Cheating negates any combination.

Excellent post and fully agreed, just one term to nitpick: You mean sex-favorable (open to personally having sex and enjoying it), not sex-positive (taking the general political stance that sex can and should be a force of good in people's lives, regardless of whether or not someone personally ever wants to have it). 

 

Sex-positive and sex-repulsed aren't contradictions; people can be both at the same time. (Again: The Sword themselves is an example. )

 

 

4 hours ago, RoseGoesToYale said:

Cheating negates any combination.

Re-quoted for emphasis, and strongly seconded (or thirded, seeing as Sally already said so too).

 

 

7 hours ago, AloneTogether said:

For me ENM would be a compromise. It’s certainly not my first choice, which always has been and will always remain a satisfying sex life with my wife. Unfortunately that’s not going to happen, so am I willing to accept this compromise? I am, if my wife is. That’s still to be seen. I can see what @The Sword says that for some ENM is not a compromise, it is innate to who they are and for them monogamy would be a compromise. That does not describe me. 

What The Sword specifically meant is, if the ENM option feels like compromise (i.e. all sides involve feel like they have to give something up), it's a lot less likely to work out in the medium or long run. Choosing ENM as the framework for the relationship should optimally be something everyone involved is enthusiastic about; and at the very least, it should feel like an exciting experiment rather than a not really desired choice.

 

Even (maybe especially?) as someone who sees poly as something they are, and is strongly opposed to living in mono arrangements... The Sword is always skeptical about couples who try ENM as a band-aid solution. It's highly unlikely to work as one.

 

 

 

[RoseGoesToYale]

12 minutes ago, The Sword said:

Excellent post and fully agreed, just one term to nitpick: You mean sex-favorable (open to personally having sex and enjoying it), not sex-positive (taking the general political stance that sex can and should be a force of good in people's lives, regardless of whether or not someone personally ever wants to have it). 

 

I edited it. Sorry, my brain was on auto-pilot.

[The Sword]

8 minutes ago, RoseGoesToYale said:

Sorry, my brain was on auto-pilot.

If that sort of post is what your brain produces on auto-pilot, you can be damn proud of your brain, Rose. 

[AloneTogether]

3 hours ago, The Sword said:

What The Sword specifically meant is, if the ENM option feels like compromise (i.e. all sides involve feel like they have to give something up), it's a lot less likely to work out in the medium or long run. Choosing ENM as the framework for the relationship should optimally be something everyone involved is enthusiastic about; and at the very least, it should feel like an exciting experiment rather than a not really desired choice.

 

Even (maybe especially?) as someone who sees poly as something they are, and is strongly opposed to living in mono arrangements... The Sword is always skeptical about couples who try ENM as a band-aid solution. It's highly unlikely to work as one.

I sincerely hope you are wrong. Since for me it seems like the only way to save anything of my marriage which I desperately want to do, just not enough to accept celibacy. 

[The Sword]

7 minutes ago, AloneTogether said:

I sincerely hope you are wrong. Since for me it seems like the only way to save anything of my marriage which I desperately want to do, just not enough to accept celibacy. 

Well, definitely keeping The Sword's fingers crossed for you.

[Traveler40]

2 hours ago, AloneTogether said:

I sincerely hope you are wrong. Since for me it seems like the only way to save anything of my marriage which I desperately want to do, just not enough to accept celibacy. 

I am living proof that they’re not correct. Read all you can and blaze your own path with care. Communicate.
 

I’m living life, not theorizing on it. Next Friday will be 7 years and counting. Amazing!
 

Family dinner last night had us all pile into my car. My lover drove, my husband sat up front while the kids and I sat in back. We laughed, Riddle-shared and joked our way across another beautiful night. I want more sexy time, but this is beyond my dream at the outset.

Life well lived is possible in this without being enthusiastic by all going in, or Poly by nature. Fact.

 

EDIT: Ours is but one story. I don’t advocate ignorance, keeping one’s head in the sand or speed which displays lack of care most times.

 

I do advocate for full communication, approaching decisions with care and an eye for the least collateral damage. I’m also for not losing time to “the waiting place” as dubbed by Dr. Seuss.  
 

Best of luck! 

[User001]

17 hours ago, Liara said:

But what does that change?

In some situations it may change nothing, but hopefully it provides some helpful perspective and a staring point for a new conversation at least. 

 

Even here you can see individuals that are not celibate sexuals in a mixed relationship, but are confidently making unhelpful and inaccurate statements about what it is like to be one. If that is how they interpret the situation, how can you expect an asexual to interpret it any clearer?

 

The asexual in a mixed relationship needs to understand that they have significantly more influence over the state and direction of the relationship.  And since they aren't in it for the sex, presumably they are in it for the relationship itself... So wouldn't they want to explore options for building an otherwise strong, healthy and caring relationship?  Wouldn't they want to see their partner happy and fulfilled?

 

Because, no, leaving the relationship is not always an option. And suggesting that somebody staying in that relationship is then choosing to be celibate is not only wrong but an incredibly unhelpful reinforcement of that inaccuracy. 

[The Sword]

7 minutes ago, User001 said:

Because, no, leaving the relationship is not always an option. And suggesting that somebody staying in that relationship is then choosing to be celibate is not only wrong but an incredibly unhelpful reinforcement of that inaccuracy. 

You're wrong on both accounts. It is both completely correct, and also helpful. A lot of your frustration seems to stem from your unwillingness to accept this as true.

 

 

7 minutes ago, User001 said:

The asexual in a mixed relationship needs to understand that they have significantly more influence over the state and direction of the relationship. 

That is indeed correct, and in terms of partnered sex, it's exactly as it should be, because that's how consent works. "No" must always weigh infinitely higher than "Yes", and nobody ever is entitled to sexual contact with anyone (no, not even in a committed partner relationship).

[WhiteCatandcherries]

1 hour ago, The Sword said:

That is indeed correct, and in terms of partnered sex, it's exactly as it should be, because that's how consent works. "No" must always weigh infinitely higher than "Yes", and nobody ever is entitled to sexual contact with anyone (no, not even in a committed partner relationship).

Thank you for pointing this out. The sexual person have the same ability to walk away from the relationship and thus end the situation as the asexual person does, but when it comes to "should sex be happening within the relationship" the right to say no to sex should weigh higher than the sexual person's want for sex. Even if you say it is a need for sex, that need never entitles you to have "sex" (whether sex is the right word for it at that point) with someone who explicitly dont want to be having that sex. 

[Traveler40]

5 hours ago, User001 said:

Even here you can see individuals that are not celibate sexuals in a mixed relationship, but are confidently making unhelpful and inaccurate statements about what it is like to be one. If that is how they interpret the situation, how can you expect an asexual to interpret it any clearer?

What does this mean? 

 

I am a “not celibate sexual in a mixed relationship” making fully accurate statements and explaining what it is like to be in my relationship as it stands today - after having done the work. I can say this confidently as a person who did my time  in the box for the better part of 2 decades.

 

You Are Not A Victim.

 

Unless you’re in a basement under lock and key as a prisoner somewhere, you have a choice and a voice. I suggest using those towards a better construct to your life if unhappy. 
 

The options have been presented. That’s what you’ve got. Rage all you want against the circumstance here, most get it. Trying to spotlight the crappy options or those that walk through them and flip their scripts won’t do anything for you or others. 
 

Facing energy inward and applying the options to your situation thoughtfully is what you’ve got. If you choose to do nothing but highlight the injustice, that’s a valid choice. 
 

Nothing will change and misery will reign, but that’s a choice.

[Traveler40]

“The box” of a mixed relationship is real. It’s dark and confining. It also traps both your mind and emotions. You lose vision,  and thinking your way out of it is near impossible. It sucks when you’re feeling trapped there.
 

I recall the despair and realizing the irony of being a solutions expert in a life situation that seemingly had no solution…

 

Seemingly is the operative word. There’s always a solution. You may not like the outcomes as extrapolated by your limited vision, but you may be wrong. 
 

I could have ended up divorced and co-parenting our children instead of taking a lover.  (Divorce was the worst option in my mind.) However, I’d hit rock bottom and staying in the box became worse than that outcome. I was willing to try for the impossible.
 

My misery motivated me to move against the fear of change. 
 

It was tough. Thinking back, I have no idea how I lived as long as I did in that box. I got to the point where I was willing to risk it all to save myself. It was that bad. 
 

In the end, we worked together and saved our family and ourselves. It’s not all picnics and cupcakes. It’s less than ideal, but for my mixed relationship? It’s as good as it gets, and I love my life.
 

Who knows where it goes, but these last 7 years is a major percentage of our lives and it’s been vastly better than the alternatives.

 

EDIT: All outcomes will be different, of course. Others could end up divorced anyway. Who knows, but I’m a believer in doing the work one way or the other.
 

The outcome of doing nothing is known. If that’s how you envision your life, so be it. It’s a valid choice as well. 

[Olallieberry]

We're not here to count options for people, we're here to name them. "Compromise/no-compromise" isn't informative to people who need the information.

[AloneTogether]

1 hour ago, Traveler40 said:

“The box” of a mixed relationship is real. It’s dark and confining. It also traps both your mind and emotions. You lose vision,  and thinking your way out of it is near impossible. It sucks when you’re feeling trapped there.

I’m still in that box right now, but I’ve come to realise my wife didn’t build this box. I built it for myself and I’ve made the mistake for too long of waiting for her to let me out of it, but it was never her who was keeping me in it. It was always myself and it’s only me who can get myself out. 
 

Right now other life challenges mean I don’t have the emotional or mental energy to climb out right now, but these challenges won’t last for ever. The end is in sight for those and once life calms back down and I have some space I am extricating myself for that box one way or another. 
 

The important thing is it was always a choice and it was always my choice. It was her choice not to have sex with me (and one she had every right to make), but it was my choice to live like that for 30+ years. Even if it didn’t always seem like a choice at the time it always was. 
 

I think that’s what’s important about this site. It has helped me to understand the choices I’ve made and the choices I can make. There’s no point being unhappy with the choices I made. It won’t change them. All I can do is make better choices now. 

[everywhere and nowhere]

4 hours ago, User001 said:

The asexual in a mixed relationship needs to understand that they have significantly more influence over the state and direction of the relationship.  And since they aren't in it for the sex, presumably they are in it for the relationship itself... So wouldn't they want to explore options for building an otherwise strong, healthy and caring relationship?  Wouldn't they want to see their partner happy and fulfilled?

Let's turn this argument around, OK? Assume that the asexual partner is sex-averse. For them sex is not merely something they don't desire, it fills them with a sense of dread and disgust. They panic when trying to imagine personally having sex. What kind of a person would someone have to be to impose something like this on someone they claim to love? Indeed, don't you want to see your partner happy and fulfilled?

I can agree that in this situation they also have to realise that they are fundamentally incompatible with allosexual potential partners (maybe with exception of low-libido partners or a lot of openness to ethical nonmonogamy on both sides). But if they get into such a relationship, it doesn't mean that they should force themselves to do things which feel terrifying to them.

I'm not in a relationship, for reasons which go further than just my strict unwillingness to ever have sex. But I am a sex-averse person and therefore, despite me not being in a relationship, it's more than just a theoretical consideration. Even though I know that everyone is allowed to live a sex-free life if they choose so, and because of this I don't make any sexual attempts, I know what I feel when trying to imagine having sex. Please don't downplay sex aversion. If navigating a mixed relationship is a problem which affects you personally, you have to know that for many asexuals sex is something much worse than "boring", "I'd rather not", "what's the point?", "can't we do something more interesting?". I don't know what does you personal situation look like exactly, but if you ignore the whole spectrum of active negative feelings about sex - those which go beyond, and often far beyond, a mere lack of desire - you won't get far in understanding asexuality.

[Windmills of My Mind]

On 3/23/2024 at 5:15 PM, User001 said:

Celibacy is not a chosen option if forced upon a person. 

It is not usually forced upon a person. There is always the option to end the relationship. Either partner can do so. Admittedly it is not as straightforward and simple as the word "quit" seems to imply. Especially if it is a long standing relationship with deeply intertwined lives, shared property, children, a long shared history, common friends and let's not forget love. It is hard to end a relationship with a person you do love. To some (or many) it may seem shallow to end a relationship over sex. The person stepping out may face judgement by others. Not an option that is chosen lightly, yet it is an option. No one forces a person to stay in a relationship where they are unhappy because a crucial element for fulfillment (for them) is lacking.